Trumps is in!

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Not at all. A motion to adjourn is always in order, and a pledge to vote for someone on the first ballot does not mean you can't vote for adjournment before the first ballot comes up.

Alternativly, enough delegates could walk out that the remainder does not constitute a quorum.

The all assumes the Convention's rules adhere to Robert's Rules of Order. Their by-laws may vary, of course.

OK, I'll admit, they have options available.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eT6DoaTdAGY

[whell]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

In other words you see the inevitable and you are now going to "Embrace the Trump".

No. As I said earlier, I don't think we're going to have an "inevitable" here until after the convention.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by whell

No. As I said earlier, I don't think we're going to have an "inevitable" here until after the convention.

What do you think the Republicans will do if Trump gets to the convention with at least 1,237 delegates?

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

What do you think the Republicans will do if Trump gets to the convention with at least 1,237 delegates?

Dissolve the Republican Party and form a new one called the American Nationalist Party fashioned after KMT.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

What do you think the Republicans will do if Trump gets to the convention with at least 1,237 delegates?

I don't know. But its the kind of crap that I keep hearing about that concerns me. Take this for example:

Nolan Finley is a moderate - conservative opinion editor for the Detroit News. He recently wrote an opinion piece where he said:

While he claims to be expanding the GOP base, drawing in millions of new voters to Republican primaries, the loyalty of those voters are to Trump, and not to the party. If he goes away, so will they — two-thirds say they won’t vote for another Republican if Trump doesn’t get the nomination.

That makes their value to the party beyond this one election questionable. And even with their support, Trump’s presence on the ballot is likely to turn out as many or more voters motivated by stopping his election.

He goes on to write that the party nominee should adhere to the party platform / principles. And that ain't Trump, so screw the primary voters and screw Trump. So much for the Republican view that they want to have a "big tent".

Well, screw that. What these folks seem to miss is that most folks no longer believe that the elected class represents them, and that is the single most relevant factor that has prompted the rise of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. They are both the "un-candidates", not a product of the party apparatchik, and that's exactly what makes them attractive.

So folks like Finley can whine about party infidelity all they want. The candidates that are drawing away support on both sides from the marquis candidates are the un-candidates that the party's rank and file on both sides, as well as independents, seem to prefer.

I think the better question is - what will be the reaction of the independents be if their candidates of choice are not on the ballot in November? What it its the the calls made in the "smoke filled rooms" that keep those candidates off the ballot. If that happens, who will they blame for that? I suspect it will be the party that folks like Finley are so concerned about preserving.

The two party system has developed info virtual monopolies that freeze out competing thoughts and ideas. It abhors the "outsiders". The Dem nominating process is particularly bad in this regard, and here comes someone like Finley whining that the Repub nominating process isn't a similarly stacked deck. WTF?!? Problem is, based on what I'm seeing / reading, Finley's perspective is shared by the folks who might be pulling the strings at the convention in Cleveland.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by whell

I don't know. But its the kind of crap that I keep hearing about that concerns me. Take this for example:

Nolan Finley is a moderate - conservative opinion editor for the Detroit News. He recently wrote an opinion piece where he said:

While he claims to be expanding the GOP base, drawing in millions of new voters to Republican primaries, the loyalty of those voters are to Trump, and not to the party. If he goes away, so will they — two-thirds say they won’t vote for another Republican if Trump doesn’t get the nomination.

That makes their value to the party beyond this one election questionable. And even with their support, Trump’s presence on the ballot is likely to turn out as many or more voters motivated by stopping his election.

He goes on to write that the party nominee should adhere to the party platform / principles. And that ain't Trump, so screw the primary voters and screw Trump. So much for the Republican view that they want to have a "big tent".

Well, screw that. What these folks seem to miss is that most folks no longer believe that the elected class represents them, and that is the single most relevant factor that has prompted the rise of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. They are both the "un-candidates", not a product of the party apparatchik, and that's exactly what makes them attractive.

So folks like Finley can whine about party infidelity all they want. The candidates that are drawing away support on both sides from the marquis candidates are the un-candidates that the party's rank and file on both sides, as well as independents, seem to prefer.

I think the better question is - what will be the reaction of the independents be if their candidates of choice are not on the ballot in November? What it its the the calls made in the "smoke filled rooms" that keep those candidates off the ballot. If that happens, who will they blame for that? I suspect it will be the party that folks like Finley are so concerned about preserving.

The two party system has developed info virtual monopolies that freeze out competing thoughts and ideas. It abhors the "outsiders". The Dem nominating process is particularly bad in this regard, and here comes someone like Finley whining that the Repub nominating process isn't a similarly stacked deck. WTF?!? Problem is, based on what I'm seeing / reading, Finley's perspective is shared by the folks who might be pulling the strings at the convention in Cleveland.

This stuff sounds reasonable Whelly!

How in the Hell did someone with your fucked up right wing worldview come up with it?

[Rajoo]

Very well expressed Whell and impossible to predict this election or the run up to it. The two parties stand to lose power permanently.

[icenine]

Maybe the GOP is dead at the Presidential level but no one knows it yet. It is of course alive at the lower Congressional and state levels. I think the future existence of the Party rests on whether it takes the Kasich route or goes off the deep end following the current Trump Cruz xenophobic path.

[bobabode]

The food fight in the Democratic party between the Berners and the Hillfolk is not even remotely comparable to the scorched earth warfare being conducted in the Republican party. Sorry Mike.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

I don't know. But its the kind of crap that I keep hearing about that concerns me. Take this for example:

Nolan Finley is a moderate - conservative opinion editor for the Detroit News. He recently wrote an opinion piece where he said:

While he claims to be expanding the GOP base, drawing in millions of new voters to Republican primaries, the loyalty of those voters are to Trump, and not to the party. If he goes away, so will they — two-thirds say they won’t vote for another Republican if Trump doesn’t get the nomination.

That makes their value to the party beyond this one election questionable. And even with their support, Trump’s presence on the ballot is likely to turn out as many or more voters motivated by stopping his election.

He goes on to write that the party nominee should adhere to the party platform / principles. And that ain't Trump, so screw the primary voters and screw Trump. So much for the Republican view that they want to have a "big tent".

Well, screw that. What these folks seem to miss is that most folks no longer believe that the elected class represents them, and that is the single most relevant factor that has prompted the rise of both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. They are both the "un-candidates", not a product of the party apparatchik, and that's exactly what makes them attractive.

So folks like Finley can whine about party infidelity all they want. The candidates that are drawing away support on both sides from the marquis candidates are the un-candidates that the party's rank and file on both sides, as well as independents, seem to prefer.

I think the better question is - what will be the reaction of the independents be if their candidates of choice are not on the ballot in November? What it its the the calls made in the "smoke filled rooms" that keep those candidates off the ballot. If that happens, who will they blame for that? I suspect it will be the party that folks like Finley are so concerned about preserving.

The two party system has developed info virtual monopolies that freeze out competing thoughts and ideas. It abhors the "outsiders". The Dem nominating process is particularly bad in this regard, and here comes someone like Finley whining that the Repub nominating process isn't a similarly stacked deck. WTF?!? Problem is, based on what I'm seeing / reading, Finley's perspective is shared by the folks who might be pulling the strings at the convention in Cleveland.

Pissing and moaning about the very beast they've created. That's what comes of telling people that government is the enemy of the people and then setting out to prove it. The Republican Party has actually succeeded in creating a constituency that hates them as much as they hate the opposition. They need to embrace Drumpf as their future and then curl up and die.